Preference Assessment of Recruitment into a Randomized Trial for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

Dolan, Lori A.; Sabesan, Vani; Weinstein, Stuart L.; Spratt, Kevin F.
December 2008
Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, American Volume;Dec2008, Vol. 90-A Issue 12, p2594
Academic Journal
Background: Randomized controlled trials are powerful tools to evaluate the outcomes of clinical treatments. However, these trials tend to be expensive and time-consuming, and their conclusions can be threatened by several limitations. This study estimated the strength of three common limitations (underenroilment, selective enrollment, and nonadherence to protocol) in a proposed study of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Methods: Patients with scoliosis and their parents were asked to complete a web-based survey about their preferences concerning a hypothetical randomized trial. Adolescents without scoliosis and their parents also participated. Surveys included questions about treatment preference, likelihood of participation, required risk reduction, and propensity to drop out or choose a different treatment while enrolled in the study. Results: Ninety adolescents and eighty-three parents participated. Observation was preferred to bracing by the majority of subjects. Overall, 33% of the parents and adolescents would both agree to participate in the hypothetical trial. Of the subjects who would not agree to participate, the majority would rather share the decision-making responsibility with the physician than have the treatment chosen in a random fashion. Many of the subjects would consider changing treatments during the course of the trial if they were not satisfied with the outcomes; the majority of parents who preferred bracing would consider crossing over to the bracing arm if their children were randomized to observation. Conclusions: Recruitment into a randomized trial of bracing compared with observation for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis may well be problematic, considering the relatively small percentage of families who said they would consider randomization. Additionally, the threat of nonadherence to protocol may be strong and must be addressed in the protocol of the trial. Most families wanted to make the treatment decision with the physician in lieu of randomization; therefore, the role of the physician in patient recruitment and retention should not be underestimated.


Related Articles

  • Impact of Baseline Disease Severity Over 26 and 52 Weeks of Treatment with Calcitriol Ointment 3μg/g in Patients with Mild-to-moderate Plaque Psoriasis. Lebwohl, Mark; Preston, Norman; Gottschalk, Ronald W. // Journal of Clinical & Aesthetic Dermatology;Feb2012, Vol. 5 Issue 2, p28 

    Objective: Calcitriol 3μg/g ointment has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for adults with mild-tomoderate plaque psoriasis. This analysis evaluated the response to calcitriol 3μg/g ointment relative to baseline disease. Design: Retrospective analysis of data from a 12-month...

  • Randomized Controlled Trials-- an Indispensible Part of Clinical Research. Stang, Andreas // Deutsches Aerzteblatt International;9/30/2011, Vol. 108 Issue 39, p661 

    The author reflects on the advantages of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the non randomezised analysis in the evaluation of therapeutic procedure. He recommends for the randomized analysis which maintains a structural equivalence in the patient groups and which is also a main factor...

  • A simple method for analyzing data from a randomized trial with a missing binary outcome. Baker, Stuart G.; Freedman, Laurence S. // BMC Medical Research Methodology;2003, Vol. 3, p8 

    Background: Many randomized trials involve missing binary outcomes. Although many previous adjustments for missing binary outcomes have been proposed, none of these makes explicit use of randomization to bound the bias when the data are not missing at random. Methods: We propose a novel approach...

  • Clinical trials in India: Where do we stand globally? Selvarajan, Sandhiya; George, Melvin; S., Suresh Kumar; Dkhar, Steven Aibor // Perspectives in Clinical Research;Jul-Sep2013, Vol. 4 Issue 3, p160 

    Aims: To evaluate the trend of clinical trials in India over the last 4 years compared to the well-established countries using clinical trial registries since the advent of clinical trial registry of India (CTRI). Materials and Methods: The data of clinical trials registered in India, United...

  • Robert Mathie PhD interview.  // Health & Homeopathy;Autumn2013, p16 

    The article presents an interview with Robert Mathie, the research development adviser of the British Homeopathic Association. When asked how he became interested in science, Mathie says that he was reading books about biology and astronomy in primary school. He comments on the main obstacles to...

  • CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Schulz, Kenneth F.; Altman, Douglas G.; Moher, David // BMJ: British Medical Journal (Overseas & Retired Doctors Edition;3/27/2010, Vol. 340 Issue 7748, p698 

    The article offers information on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) 2010, an updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials in Great Britain. The purpose of the CONSORT 2010 is elaborated. It traces the origins of CONSORT, beginning from the first...

  • Some Main Problems Eroding the Credibility and Relevance of Randomized Trials. Ioannidis, John P. A. // Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases;2008, Vol. 66 Issue 2, p135 

    Randomized trials are an excellent research design with major advantages. However, randomized trials are not immune to biases, and inferences from them may be sometimes flawed or irrelevant. The present review addresses, in brief some of the major threats to the credibility and relevance of the...

  • Superiority, Equivalence, and Non-Inferiority Trials. Lesaffre, Emmanuel // Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases;2008, Vol. 66 Issue 2, p150 

    When the aim of the randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to show that one treatment is superior to another, a statistical test is employed and the trial (test) is called a superiority trial (test). Often a nonsignificant superiority test is wrongly interpreted as proof of no difference between...

  • Randomized Trials to Optimize Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis. Mitnick, Carole D.; Castro, Kenneth G.; Harrington, Mark; Sacks, Leonard V.; Burman, William // PLoS Medicine;Nov2007, Vol. 4 Issue 11, pe292 

    The time is now right for randomized trials of MDR-TB, say the authors, as the expansion of MDR-TB programs provides the setting in which trials can be implemented.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics